Measuring Attitudes Towards Global Learning Among Future Educators in England
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Measuring attitudes towards Global Learning among future educators in England Phil Bamber, Liverpool Hope University (England); Andrea Bullivant, Liverpool World Centre (England) and Di Stead, Independent Primary Education Consultant (England) Philip M. Bamber (corresponding author) is a Senior Lecturer in the Faculty of Education at Liverpool Hope University where he is also the founding Director of the Centre for International and Development Education. His research is concerned with transformative pedagogy, citizenship and values education. He is co-editor (with L. Bourke and J. Clarkson) of In Safe Hands: guiding principles for International Service-Learning (Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham, 2008). Contact: Faculty of Education, Liverpool Hope University, Hope Park, Liverpool L16 9JD, UK; e-mail: [email protected] Andrea Bullivant works for Liverpool World Centre, a Development Education Centre, which works with schools and teacher education to promote learning and action in relation to global and social justice issues. Andrea has collaborated with colleagues at LHU to co- author a number of papers and publications on Global Citizenship, Global Learning and Education for Sustainable Development. Di Stead is an educational consultant, working with primary teachers and their schools. She has provided in-service training from the north of England to India. She learned her craft, teaching in a primary school in the east end of Sheffield for 14 years. She then worked for almost 2 decades in higher education, at Liverpool Hope University for over 17 years and before that at Bishop Grosseteste College in Lincoln. 1 Abstract This paper reports upon a multi-agency approach to measuring attitudes towards Global Learning among future educators at a University in the North-West of England. This study provides a response to concerns that Global Learning research and evaluation of global education interventions tend to focus upon short term observable outcomes rather than longer term changes in behaviour, attitude and practice. It is based upon the assumption that Global Learning in Teacher Education must focus upon the development of who the educator is as a person, including their values, attitudes and associated dispositions. This paper will outline the process of constructing an attitude inventory, based upon Thurstone scaling, by a range of professionals working in local government, teacher education and non-government organisations that promote global education. It reports upon the use of this survey at the beginning, middle and end of a compulsory course completed by a cohort of 154 undergraduate students of Primary Teacher Education. The findings show positive changes in attitudes towards Global Learning among females and eradication of the most negative attitudes towards Global Learning during the course of study. Causal factors are suggested relating to cultural practice. The limitations of this particular tool for researching Global Learning are discussed alongside the insight gained from this collaborative process of evaluation. Key words: measuring attitudes, teacher education, global learning Introduction This paper begins by proposing a renewed focus upon values and attitudes within Global Learning research, evaluation and practice. The role of nurturing and measuring the attitudes of teachers towards Global Learning will be highlighted as an area of particular concern. This will be followed by a contextual discussion of Liverpool Hope University (LHU), a large provider of initial teacher education in the UK, that provides the setting for this study. This exploration of the mission and ethos of LHU illuminates a context that supports pedagogical approaches that nurture particular values, attitudes and dispositions associated with Global Learning. An outline of, and rationale for, the curriculum intervention under investigation here is provided to help develop further an understanding of the conditions necessary for changing teacher attitudes towards Global Learning. This provides a qualitative response to recent calls to capture empirical evidence of the nature of such conditions (Scheunpflug, 2011: 38). The methodology section documents a collaborative process to construct an 2 attitude inventory, based upon Thurstone scaling, by a multi-agency team. This included Development Education practitioners and consultants along with teacher education tutors both familiar and unfamiliar with Global Learning approaches. The findings and discussion section reports upon the use of the inventory by students in initial teacher education at three different time-points over the period of an academic year. Detailed here are the conclusions reached by the multi-agency team regarding the process of constructing an attitude inventory, the utility of this particular evaluation tool and their own understanding of Global Learning. Evaluating Global Learning and the role of attitudes The paucity of research and evaluation into the impact of Global Learning has been attributed to the embryonic nature of work in this field. O’Loughlin and Wegimot (2007: 9), in their background paper on evaluation practice and policy in relation to global education and public awareness-raising on development issues across a range of European contexts, suggest that ‘evaluation in global education and development education is still very young and new, and its future looks very interesting and potentially fruitful’. In a more nuanced account, Bourn and Hunt (2011:7) cited a number of factors, including: its relatively marginal nature in education; short term funding of projects resulting in a tendency to focus on effectiveness and efficiency rather than impact; and a tendency to pursue practice rather than theory. Support for research and evaluation has, however, been available to practitioners and researchers for some time. A major UK project, ‘Measuring Effectiveness in Development Education’ (McCollum and Bourn, 2001), highlighted an increased emphasis upon measuring learning outcomes. It also warned against a tendency to focus on short term observable outcomes, rather then longer term impacts affecting changes in behaviour and practice. This report therefore recommended that approaches to evaluation must ‘respond to understandings of attitudinal change and the relationship between processes and learning outcomes…’ (ibid, 2001: 19). Finding that the main objective for projects tended not to be changing attitudes but rather achievements such as ‘improving the capacity to deliver effective programmes…’ (ibid, 2001: 5), this report urged a focus upon linking specific programme objectives and broader Global Learning goals. Recent guidance for evaluating global learning outcomes also concludes that ‘changes in knowledge, attitudes and actions are at the heart of Global Learning’ (Think Global, 2011:12). Moving beyond evaluation of short term effectiveness, there have been attempts by 3 UK based non-government organisations to assess long term impacts, for instance in a toolkit for measuring attitudinal change in global citizenship (Allum et al, 2008). Nevertheless, in a case study of the Canadian ‘Signs of Change’ initiative, which explored the assessment of public engagement, O’Loughlin and Wegimot note particular difficulties and challenges included ‘defining, capturing and monitoring value change…’ given that it is long term and ‘difficult to predict how individuals will manifest their values’ (2007:31). That researching broader values, beliefs and character associated with Global Learning is only now emerging belies the fact that related curriculum developments over the last half century (see for example Richardson, 1976 and Fisher and Hicks, 1985) have been underpinned by the premise that global education ‘should be affective as well as cognitive’ (Lister 1986, cited in Hicks, 2008:12). These pioneering initiatives used active and participatory teaching methods to explore the development of particular values and perspectives towards global issues. A significant contribution in this area was the work of Robert Hanvey (1976: 2) who explored the notion of ‘An Attainable Global Perspective’. Hanvey proposed five dimensions, which were subsequently adapted by Pike and Selby into five aims for global education in developing an ‘irreducible global perspective’: • Systems consciousness • Perspective consciousness • Health of planet awareness • Involvement consciousness and preparedness • Process-mindedness (Pike and Selby, 1988: 34 - 5) Whilst the work of Hanvey, Pike and Selby and others have informed understanding of the ‘dimensions’ that make up a ‘global perspective’, it has not been considered extensively how these develop and can be measured. However, there have been a number of attempts to develop measurement scales from different academic disciplines in the US. Sampson and Smith’s ‘Worldmindedness Scale’ (1957) has been particularly influential. Developed in the wake of the second world war this instrument assesses predisposition towards eight dimensions of ‘worldmindedness’. Whilst the scale has been widely used, it is now outdated in its statements and values. It has also been criticized for measuring responses to particular ‘dimensions’ or global issues rather than a world(minded)view (Parker et al, 1997). More recently, Hett (1993) developed a ‘Global-mindedness Scale’ to measure ‘attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors’(Hett, 1993: 143) across five dimensions: responsibility, cultural pluralism, 4 efficacy, globalcentrism, and interconnectedness. The utility and